Should I have been a little more cautious with my flop play here?

lazlo

Ok its 10/20$ NL and we are six-handed I have about $1400 and I am in the cutoff with the 5d6s. UTG($1500...a player on tilt who has been losing all morning at a number of levels) limps.
The player to his left(Stack is circa 3.5k...he isa very capable but somewhat loose player) limps also. THe action is on me and I smooth call. The button folds and the small blind pays the extra $10 and the BB dutifully checks.

Flop [5 players-$97]

3d 2h 4d

Bingo for me! The action is checked around to me and lead for $100. The two players in the blinds both fold and UTG smooth calls. The decent player(Villain) reraises to $300. A checkraise from late position seemed very suspicious to me so I decide to belt the pot and reraise to $900 - There is something going off in the back of my head telling that I don't want a threeway allin draw to the river here...but at the same time I have the stone cold nuts at the moment....
UTG then raises allin. I'm not overly surprised or worried by this. The villain then deliberates for a while before shoving his chips in the middle. I didnt expect this and I decide to call.

UTG has the Kd7d for a flush draw and the Villain has 4s4c for top set.

Turn[3 players-$4193.46]

2c

Balls Balls Balls.......

River[3 players-$4193.46]

6c

I apppreciate that I was a slight favourite in this spot and that its never really a bad thing to tank the nuts if you're getting action. However I'm wondering whether it would have been more prudent to have simply called Villains reraise...after all I wasnt guaranteed to keep either player in unless they had substantial racing material.... and even with the nut straight I was aware that it was quite possible that someone had flopped 2 pair or a set in that spot, especially with it being an unraised pot...

I suppose at teh end of the day I did get great value on my hand, however part of me feels that a degree of caution may be warranted when you may be treading a very fine racing line...any thoughts?

ianmc38

If you can get them both all-in on the flop that's great.

I was reading your blog very briefly and it appears that your bankroll management is diabolical (at best)!

lazlo

ianmc38 wrote:

If you can get them both all-in on the flop that's great.

I was reading your blog very briefly and it appears that your bankroll management is diabolical (at best)!

The latter is a pretty accurate observation...but I'm trying to bludgeon discipline into myself!

Bandana boy

You 100% have to ship it here
Yes if you know what there holding you are not that big a fav to win the hand but your are still a fav
now As it urns out they have all the bases covered to outdraw you but you dont know that
They could have 2 sets in which case you are massive fav they could have 2 fds again big they could be playing with set and smaller straight all which make you really big fav to win the hand
Calling here if you have any respect for 1 of the players is bad i would only call here if i felt the villain would lay down to a re-raise but would bet a missed turn

MrPillowTalk

There is nothing wrong with getting them both all in here.

If you can put someone on a set or two pair, as villain has just showed you with his flop cr then I often flat call, the reason being that if a blank falls on the turn he still is going to go broke with you but if the board pairs you can get away without getting stacked.

A similar situation is when your opponent is on tilt and you flop 2 pair or a set and get cr on the flop which holds a flush draw, sometimes I prefer to call and see an off suit turn before putting in the rest of the money but this is more marginal and only to be used against poor players.

Lafortezza

Is it ever correct to fold the nuts on the flop in Hold'em?? Omaha yes not hold'em though.

MrPillowTalk

lafortezza wrote:

Is it ever correct to fold the nuts on the flop in Hold'em?? Omaha yes not hold'em though.

I dont think he is suggesting folding as an option laf

Bandana boy

MrPillowTalk wrote:

There is nothing wrong with getting them both all in here.

If you can put someone on a set or two pair, as villain has just showed you with his flop cr then I often flat call, the reason being that if a blank falls on the turn he still is going to go broke with you but if the board pairs you can get away without getting stacked.

A similar situation is when your opponent is on tilt and you flop 2 pair or a set and get cr on the flop which holds a flush draw, sometimes I prefer to call and see an off suit turn before putting in the rest of the money but this is more marginal and only to be used against poor players.

My only problem is that we need to know what a scare card is here
It turns out that any scare card destroys us but this could easily be smaller straight and a set and then we fold to the flush on the turn? no good get it in my man and embrace the variance

Lafortezza

MrPillowTalk wrote:

I dont think he is suggesting folding as an option laf

Ok, let me rephrase Is it ever correct to be cautious about getting all in on the flop with the nuts in Hold'em?

MrPillowTalk

Bandana boy wrote:

My only problem is that we need to know what a scare card is here
It turns out that any scare card destroys us but this could easily be smaller straight and a set and then we fold to the flush on the turn? no good get it in my man and embrace the variance

Lets say for arguments case we flat call the cr to 300 and first to act calls also. If for arguments sake it was set and non nut straight or straight draw then if a flush card hits no one will go after the pot. It would take a bet ofat least 600 to find out if anybody has the flush and everyone will have a flush in everyone elses range the way it played so far, thus the action on the turn would go check check check most probably.

Allthought I do see what your saying, my advice was more for hu pots than multiway.

MrPillowTalk

lafortezza wrote:

Ok, let me rephrase Is it ever correct to be cautious about getting all in on the flop with the nuts in Hold'em?

Yeah when you have a straight against a set it can be a better move to call and see a turn. imo obviously Im sure many will strongly dissagree.

empirix

I would of went all in after the reraise from the villain myself, purely because of the 2 d's on the board, i'd be happy for them too fold then, dangerous flop although you do have a diamond yourself

Bandana boy

MrPillowTalk wrote:

Lets say for arguments case we flat call the cr to 300 and first to act calls also. If for arguments sake it was set and non nut straight or straight draw then if a flush card hits no one will go after the pot. It would take a bet ofat least 600 to find out if anybody has the flush and everyone will have a flush in everyone elses range the way it played so far, thus the action on the turn would go check check check most probably.

Allthought I do see what your saying, my advice was more for hu pots than multiway.

unless say it was Ad 5c for the smaller straight

I get what your saying and there is lots of times I would hold of waiting for a turn card but i do not believe we can here there is too many times we lose action we want and/or make a mistake on the turn
We know that getting it all in here is never going to be a "mistake"

Bandana boy

MrPillowTalk wrote:

Yeah when you have a straight against a set it can be a better move to call and see a turn. imo obviously Im sure many will strongly dissagree.

if we "know " he has a set and betting patterns and the like can tell us this then your right
if his "set" is sometimes 2 pair or worse straight then we only leave ourselves open to making a bad fold on the turn

ianmc38

lafortezza wrote:

Is it ever correct to fold the nuts on the flop in Hold'em??

No

bops

due to the amount of times ive gone broke floppping the nuts in a 3 way pot, I always call the flop raise and run away if the board pairs/FD hits

if the turn is a blank I ship them, if not i just know im screwed

cardshark202

Bad Beat Sticky please

lazlo

cardshark202 wrote:

Bad Beat Sticky please

It was hardly a bad beat, the villain had good odds to call regardless of whether I had the nuts here or not. There was no way in the wide world that I would ever have been consideringa fold here either - I was just second guessing the most important part of this hand where I instigated the allin action with my raise to $900.

Marq

I disagree that this should go in the bad beat sticky. It's an interesting question. Just like in omaha, the nut straight on the flop is unlikely to remain the nuts but the river in holdem, so if you're getting a lot of action it Could conceivably be correct to slow down until you see the turn. however, I think that with so many awful players out there, and a flop like this, where someone could be drawing to a flush or a house and may play the hand the same with either or even two pair, by convincing yourself that your opponent has one draw you could be setting yourself up for a very bad fold at some point in the hand.

Bops, just because you ahve lost when you've flopped the nuts in the past doesn't mean that you shouldn't try to get two players all in when you flop them again. That's just idiotic.

Samba

Considering your stack size there is only one move, if you were deeper it might be better to flat call, I think the only turn card that comes off that you get away from the hand is a d with that stack size.

Hectorjelly

If you are asking this question, you are playing too high.

Tar.Aldarion

I see nothing wrong with getting them both all-in here on the flop.

lolkelly

ianmc38 wrote:

If you can get them both all-in on the flop that's great.

I was reading your blog very briefly and it appears that your bankroll management is diabolical (at best)!

If you want to see bad bankroll management check out this guy!!

http://88percent.blogspot.com/:eek:

MrPillowTalk

Samba wrote:

Considering your stack size there is only one move, if you were deeper it might be better to flat call, I think the only turn card that comes off that you get away from the hand is a d with that stack size.

the guy in the middle never makes it 300 with a flush draw, a diamond isnt the scare card board pairing is, I think we are deep enough to fold if the board pairs.

cardshark202

Wtf is this???? You have the nuts, you get a lot of action, you get it all in vs 2 players. Great. This thread is over imo.

Mr. Flibble

Not the same as this hand, but if we were deep and I had 23 and knew my opponent had AA and the flop was A45r I would NEVER reraise them on the flop or most turns as all the money is going in regardless on the river (so long as the board does not pair of course).

5starpool

Mr. Flibble wrote:

Not the same as this hand, but if we were deep and I had 23 and knew my opponent had AA and the flop was A45r I would NEVER reraise them on the flop or most turns as all the money is going in regardless on the river (so long as the board does not pair of course).

How could you 'know' your opponent has AA? This is one of these hypothetical situations that are pointless to discuss imo.

lazlo

5starpool wrote:

How could you 'know' your opponent has AA? This is one of these hypothetical situations that are pointless to discuss imo.

Well its an appropriate analogy as I 'knew' that the villain in my circumstances had either a set or top 2-pair...

Bandana boy

So if you know he has set or top two pair what do you do if bottom card pairs the board ?
Is this not also sometime worse straight or Fd and straight redraw ?
At this point you have a hunch on what hand he has but you know the strength of your hand now get it in now

LuckyLloyd

This post has been deleted.

El Stuntman

lolkelly wrote:

If you want to see bad bankroll management check out this guy!!

http://88percent.blogspot.com/:eek:

LOL, I lifted this from his blog

"the main problem will be getting off my current downswing. a few people have said i should get out now while i'm still ahead, obviously i can't do that. i want to be a much better player than i am now and also, i think i am addicted. i don't see my addiction as a problem, just a love for the game."

bops

Marq wrote:

Bops, just because you ahve lost when you've flopped the nuts in the past doesn't mean that you shouldn't try to get two players all in when you flop them again. That's just idiotic.

Marq - it's not a 50c/1$ game - its a lot of money we're talking about here.

I do realise that he is favouite to win the hand, but not by much imo and therefore it is often a safer (maybe not the correct) play too see a cheaper turn card.

I do talk from much experience and it is not nice to build up a good stack on a table and loose it this way - it happens way to often im afraid.

definately not idiotic, just safer

In saying that i suppose HectorJelly has a good point, maybe if you're not confortable taking those odds, smaller levels would be better

phantom_lord

bops wrote:

Marq - it's not a 50c/1$ game - its a lot of money we're talking about here.

I do realise that he is favouite to win the hand, but not by much imo and therefore it is often a safer (maybe not the correct) play too see a cheaper turn card.

I do talk from much experience and it is not nice to build up a good stack on a table and loose it this way - it happens way to often im afraid.

definately not idiotic, just safer

In saying that i suppose HectorJelly has a good point, maybe if you're not confortable taking those odds, smaller levels would be better

This is illogical and warped thinking.

bops

phantom_lord wrote:

This is illogical and warped thinking.

that's me alright!!

it's fine to get all your chips in after the flop in the hand if your BR is 50k+
- then its logical.

otherwise warped thinking is the way forward im afraid

fuzzbox

bops wrote:

I do realise that he is favouite to win the hand, but not by much imo and therefore it is often a safer (maybe not the correct) play too see a cheaper turn card.

He is approx 1/3 to win the hand, as are each of the other participants when they both turn over the hands that they do turn over (a set and a flush draw + gutshot for split).

However - that is only one particular case. In many many other cases, we are a big equity winner if we get all-in Vs two other players (and of course one other player) on this flop.

Situations such as : -
Us Vs set and other set - we win a LOT
Us Vs fd and other fd - we win a LOT
Us Vs set and two pair - we win a LOT
Us Vs set and 66 - we win a LOT
Us Vs fd and two pair - we win a LOT

Get all in now, in case the turn puts a club on board, and we either A. get bluffed of the best hand by a set ... or B. miss out on any further action from a worse hand (like two pair/set/66/65 etc).

Mr. Flibble

5starpool wrote:

How could you 'know' your opponent has AA? This is one of these hypothetical situations that are pointless to discuss imo.

Sometimes you just know. If some guy has a 2% prf and never reraises pf without AA or KK and that flop comes and he still shows interest ruling out KK, then he has AA. No two ways about it.

Its going to be rare that you are playing that sort of player and that hand comes up, but it certainly could happen.

Playing at the stakes lazlo is its more likly a player will get away from AAA on the river, but you wouldn't see it much in the games I play so waiting is definitely +EV.

Samba

MrPillowTalk wrote:

the guy in the middle never makes it 300 with a flush draw, a diamond isnt the scare card board pairing is, I think we are deep enough to fold if the board pairs.

Approx. 30-35 bb's? , 75d is a strong possibility considering it's an unraised pot and it's certainly a hand that's likely to check raise.

5starpool

Mr. Flibble wrote:

Sometimes you just know. If some guy has a 2% prf and never reraises pf without AA or KK and that flop comes and he still shows interest ruling out KK, then he has AA. No two ways about it.

Its going to be rare that you are playing that sort of player and that hand comes up, but it certainly could happen.

Playing at the stakes lazlo is its more likly a player will get away from AAA on the river, but you wouldn't see it much in the games I play so waiting is definitely +EV.

Ok, but here is the pedantic fcuker in me coming out. If there is a really really tight dude that raised preflop and is very intrerested on a flop of A45, then what the hell were you doing in the pot with 23?

To go back on topic, I think there are merits in both approaches, but in Holdem you may be up against a variet of hands against a variety of player abilites, and you should definitely be happy to get it all in on the flop if you can. The hand in the OP is nearly the worst case scenario though, and is a situation much more common to Omaha when you can be far more confident that there are very likely holdings to this out there with several other parties still being interested. In Omaha, it is quite likely that I would prefer not to inflate the pot unduly here until I seen a turn card, but again this depends on the situation at the time.

Mr. Flibble

5starpool wrote:

Ok, but here is the pedantic fcuker in me coming out. If there is a really really tight dude that raised preflop and is very intrerested on a flop of A45, then what the hell were you doing in the pot with 23?

We were very deep and he's a bad player (hence the 2%pfr)